9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ays of CIRP period came to end on 10.11.2020. This Tribunal further passed orders of second extension of CIRP period by 60 days on 08.01.2021 with direction to Resolution Professional to complete the process within 330 days failing which liquidation proceedings to begin. Aggrieved by the said order, the Resolution Professional preferred an appeal vide CA (AT)(CH)(Insolvency) No. 15 of 2021 before Hon'ble NCLAT. Hon'ble NCLAT dismissed the appeal on the grounds of being premature and otiose and directed this Adjudicating Authority to dispose of on merits IA 120/2021, which is filed seeking extension of 60 days. 3. When the Resolution Professional failed to receive any satisfactory resolution plan, a revised Form-G was re-issued on 25.01.2021, and the last date for submission of resolution plans was consciously fixed as 24.02.2021 (later extended to 01.03.2021) keeping in view the closure date for CIRP i.e. 08.03.2021. A revised Form-G was re-issued by Resolution Professional on 01.03.2021 and the date of submission of Resolution Plans was fixed as 06.03.2021. The Applicant submitted their resolution plan on 06.03.2021 along with EMD of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tend the overall time of 330 days to complete the CIRP when this Adjudicating Authority is vested with the said jurisdiction and it is improper on the part of Resolution Professional/CoC to unilaterally extend the time to accept additional plan for consideration of Vedanta Resolution Plan after completion of the overall limit of 330 days. To buttress their case, the Applicant relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors., reported in (2020) 8 SCC 531, where in it held that discretion of extending the time beyond 330 days is permissible only when it can demonstrate to the Adjudicating Authority that a short time was required to complete the process. 7. The Applicant raised objections vide their letter dated 30.04.2021 for accepting additional resolution plans after the deadline. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kalpraj Dharamshi & Anr. v. Kotak Investment Advisors Ltd. referred to by the Resolution Professional in his reply letter dated 13.05.2021 is inapt in the instant case as the resolution plan of Kalpraj was accepted by the CoC, albeit before the expiry of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re as no decision vis-a-vis its approval is taken by the CoC. This proposition of law was also reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors., wherein it held that no vested right inheres in any resolution Applicant to have its resolution plan considered by the CoC. 11. The Resolution Professional submits that the decision of the CoC to extend the timeline beyond 08.03.2021 was subject to the outcome of 330-390 days' extension application. 12. Vedanta Limited was in the list of PRAs since December 2020 and submitted its EoI on 27.02.2020 and found place in the final list of PRAs issued by Resolution Professional on 08.03.2020 and 03.02.2021. Vedanta Limited filed its EoI within the stipulated time as per Regulation 36(A)(6) of the CIRP Regulations. Though Vedanta Limited indicated its inability to file the Resolution Plan prior to 08.03.2021 and filed it on 16.04.2021, the CoC in its commercial wisdom decided to consider the Vedanta Resolution Plan as no plan was approved by the CoC as on 16.04.2021. 13. The Resolution Professional submits that fair and equal opportunity was provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that a resolution applicant may submit a resolution plan to the resolution professional prepared on the basis of the information memorandum. Whereas Regulation 36A(5) speaks of the methodology of submission of EoI by the Prospective Resolution Applicants. The Prospective Resolution Applicants who meet the requirements of the invitation for expression of interest, shall submit expression of interest within the "time specified" in the invitation under clause (b) of sub-regulation (3). Regulation 36A(6) also very clearly mentions that the Eols received after the time specified in the invitation under Clause (b) of sub-regulation (3) shall be rejected. 18. Regulation 36B deals with Request for Resolution Plans and Regulation 36B(2) details each step in the process and the manner and purposes of interaction between the resolution professional and the prospective resolution applicant, along with corresponding timelines and Regulation 36B(6) deals with extension of timelines for submission of resolution plans with the approval of the committee. Regulation 36B(7) empowers the resolution professional to re-issue request for resolution plan with the approval of the committee, if the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
